Coronavirus

[Dave2002]

I am not a biologist or specialist in bacteria or viruses. However, it occurs to me that viruses could attack bacteria and bacteria could thus act as agents to spread a virus, and possibly also form part of a cure.

I was completely unsure of this, so I checked a few basics.

* Bacteria are bigger than viruses [1]

* Bacteria may have both/either RNA and DNA [2][3]

* Bacteria reproduce assexually.

Viruses require a living host in order to replicate.

Bacteria can live on inert surfaces.

Over to the experts.

[1] https://www.diffen.com/difference/Bacteria_vs_Virus

[2] https://study.com/academy/lesson/do-...-have-dna.html

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacterial_small_RNA

[MrGongGong]

So what is it Matt ?
"Rules" or "Guidance" ?

It's fine for those who live in houses with gardens and outdoor space to not be where others are (which applies to where I live as well as the wealthier parts of the UK) but there's more than a little "do as I say , not as I do" going on which is very dangerous indeed.


From The Guardian

Hancock: you've got to follow the rules or we'll ban all exercise outside

Matt Hancock, the health secretary, has said the government could ban exercise outdoors if people flout lockdown rules.

After saying earlier that sunbathing is against lockdown rules, he told Andrew Marr that if people flout them “we might have to take further action”.

“I understand how difficult these measures are, of course I do. But the truth is the more people go out from home, the more the virus spreads,” he said.

“We’ve said because of the positive benefits to your physical and your mental health that it’s ok to exercise on your own or with members of your own household.

“But if the result of that is that too many people go out and flout the other rules because they say ‘well if I can exercise, then it’s fine for me to do other things’, then I’m afraid we will have to take action.

“My message is really clear, if you don’t want us to have to take the step to ban exercise of all forms outside of your own home then you’ve got to follow the rules.”

[Bryn]

So what is it Matt ?
"Rules" or "Guidance"

It's fine for those who live in houses with gardens and outdoor space to not be where others are (which applies to where I live as well as the wealthier parts of the UK) but there's more than a little "do as I say , not as I do" going on which is very dangerous indeed.


From The Guardian

The wishy-washy "guidance" has become "instruction". In the spirit of encouraging others, I am refraining from even the very safe, well distanced walking beyond the garden I am so fortunate to have to exercise in.

[Dave2002]

So what is it Matt ?
"Rules" or "Guidance" ?

It's fine for those who live in houses with gardens and outdoor space to not be where others are (which applies to where I live as well as the wealthier parts of the UK) but there's more than a little "do as I say , not as I do" going on which is very dangerous indeed.


From The Guardian

I agree that there is a significant problem for some people. Maybe "they" should organise rotas for going out, for people who have problems. Families with 10 kids in a one bedroomed flat, for example. That would be better than a complete lockdown if the risks balance out well enough - which they might not.

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

I am not a biologist or specialist in bacteria or viruses. However, it occurs to me that viruses could attack bacteria and bacteria could thus act as agents to spread a virus, and possibly also form part of a cure.

I was completely unsure of this, so I checked a few basics.

* Bacteria are bigger than viruses [1]

* Bacteria may have both/either RNA and DNA [2][3]

* Bacteria reproduce assexually.

Viruses require a living host in order to replicate.

Bacteria can live on inert surfaces.

Over to the experts.

[1] https://www.diffen.com/difference/Bacteria_vs_Virus

[2] https://study.com/academy/lesson/do-...-have-dna.html

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacterial_small_RNA

Viruses are indeed tiny, and remained unseen until the invention of the electron microscope, though it was thought the existed. Bacteria are significantly larger and are visible under an ordinary microscope. Protozoa are bigger still.

[Stanfordian]

Most people seem to be trying hard to be responsible with measures such as social distancing and avoiding gathering in groups etc.
However today I have seen news reports of:

Groups of people gathering in parks etc. (mainly young people) .
Cyclists and motor bikers out in groups.
Groups having barbecues going on Brighton beach.
Man City footballer hosting a party.

[Dave2002]

Viruses are indeed tiny, and remained unseen until the invention of the electron microscope, though it was thought the existed. Bacteria are significantly larger and are visible under an ordinary microscope. Protozoa are bigger still.

https://www.differencebetween.com/di...d-vs-bacteria/ Characteristics of and differences between bacteria and protozoa.

[johnb]

Most people seem to be trying hard to be responsible with measures such as social distancing and avoiding gathering in groups etc.
However today I have seen news reports of:

Groups of people gathering in parks etc. (mainly young people) .
Cyclists and motor bikers out in groups.
Groups having barbecues going on Brighton beach.
Man City footballer hosting a party.

... and the Chief Medical Officer for Scotland driving her family/her husband 40 miles to their holiday cottage two weekends on the row.

[LeMartinPecheur]

I hope this is a cheerful, statistically significant stat

As noted way above, I've been monitoring the new case figures for a dozen southern local authority areas from Kent across to Cornwall for the last couple of weeks. Today is the first day they've all been below a 20% increase on previous day. I don't think this can just be because Sunday is a slack day for statistics and statisticians: last Sunday 6 out of 12 were above this figure, with two above 30%.

I'll be watching of course for any 'compensatory' jumps tomorrow.

[Simon B]

Thx.
Which on the figures you include seem pretty variable and thus is it not tricky to work out a trend at the mo?
Or is that just my stupidity?

The trite but valid answer is - it depends.

The "temporal blurring" shown in johnb's breakdown of 637 might not matter very much. If there's any consistency to it - i.e. even vaguely the same weighting of each previous days' data appearing in today's figure - this is just smoothing the data out a bit and might even be making the trend easier to spot, albeit with additional lag.

Competent data analysts should be able to unpick such an artefact. [Overly technical: The data is being convolved with an asymmetric blurring vector - if this is consistent it would be possible to estimate this blurring vector and deconvolve the data with its inverse to reverse the blurring]. This process is vaguely analogous with how auto-focus on modern digital cameras works.

If it's inconsistent then the best you can do is treat the perturbations as a random variable superposed on the trend you're trying to estimate. It doesn't prevent you estimating the trend, it just means you can have less confidence in your estimate. You can also estimate the error bounds in your estimate of the trend - that will also get worse if there are more confounding factors in the data

This is a long winded, over-technical way of saying that the more confusing the data is, the longer an apparent trend has to go on before you have any confidence it's not an illusion.

It's easy to produce graphs of exponential regressions like this one (25%/day increase versus actual UK deaths up to 5/4/20 inclusive). Whether it means anything is another matter...

[Anastasius]

So what is it Matt ?
"Rules" or "Guidance" ?

It's fine for those who live in houses with gardens and outdoor space to not be where others are (which applies to where I live as well as the wealthier parts of the UK) but there's more than a little "do as I say , not as I do" going on which is very dangerous indeed.


From The Guardian

I can see where you're coming from and, for once, I agree with you

But I can also see where he is coming from. Sunbathing in itself...I see no harm in that. But then when that expands to groups of people all doing it hugger-mugger...all well within the 2m distance.. then he's right. Thing is, you're assuming that most people have commonsense to avoid breaching the 2m 'rule'. In my experience, commonsense is sadly lacking. Viz 3000 people in that park yesterday. I found that profoundly depressing. If they want to go ahead and get Covid-19 and even die from it then that's fine by me...their own stupidity. But if they then go and infect other people...place an extra burden on the NHS staff then IMO they are well out of order.

[MrGongGong]

I can see where you're coming from and, for once, I agree with you

But I can also see where he is coming from. Sunbathing in itself...I see no harm in that. But then when that expands to groups of people all doing it hugger-mugger...all well within the 2m distance.. then he's right. Thing is, you're assuming that most people have commonsense to avoid breaching the 2m 'rule'. In my experience, commonsense is sadly lacking. Viz 3000 people in that park yesterday. I found that profoundly depressing. If they want to go ahead and get Covid-19 and even die from it then that's fine by me...their own stupidity. But if they then go and infect other people...place an extra burden on the NHS staff then IMO they are well out of order.

I've had a melanoma lots of harm in "sunbathing"

BUT the real issue is (IMV) one of "do as I say not as I do"
YES, we need to protect people and keep distances
but that's ok if you live in a big house in rural Suffolk and have land

The recent Scottish example is pretty clear

[ardcarp]

Sunbathing in itself...I see no harm in that. But then when that expands to groups of people all doing it hugger-mugger...all well within the 2m distance.. then he's right. Thing is, you're assuming that most people have commonsense to avoid breaching the 2m 'rule'.

Far be it for me to approve or disapprove of others' behaviour, but bear in mind that a family group (meaning the people living in a single household) are allowed to exercise together. If they happen to stop for a rest together, but separate from anyone else, I would have thought that from a purely scientific/medical point of view this is far, far less problematic than people going to work on public transport.

The 'going to work' thing is probably the shakiest of the 'rules'. It says anyone can go to work if they can't work at home. It doesn't specify what sort of work is allowed, i.e. it isn't restricted to key workers..

[johnb]

I would have thought that from a purely scientific/medical point of view this is far, far less problematic than people going to work on public transport.

That reminds me of something I've been pondering on.

I am due to have scans and a Anti-Vegf injection for Wet AMD in my right eye on the 1st May. The powers that be have decided that I have my injections at a (semi) mobile unit in a Morrison's car park (I joke not) 6 miles and a 45 minute bus journey away from my home, rather than at the Bristol Eye Hospital which is just a 15 minute walk.

Driving after the scan and injection is impossible because of blurry vision.

I am quite concerned about the risk of the two 45 minute bus journeys. I will phone the appointments phone number nearer the time - but it might come down to not having the injection (hooray ... I think) or risking public transport.

(My eyesight isn't at all bad, all things considered and I usually score 6:6 or 6:7 on the tests they do, admittedly in ideal lighting conditions.)

[Count Boso]

I am quite concerned about the risk of the two 45 minute bus journeys. I will phone the appointments phone number nearer the time - but it might come down to not having the injection (hooray ... I think) or risking public transport.

I had an appointment at the local Dental Hospital (also a bus journey away) on March 19. I rang and cancelled it as I'd just started self-isolation and said could I ring and make an appointment later, and they said, No, I had to make a new appointment then or I'd be discharged. The new one is for 28 May. I shall cancel that one too and make another if necessary as it's not an urgent problem.